Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Gar · 06-02-2003, 02:07 PM

OK. I know I'm a bad infidel for not following this, but what happened to the case that challenged the pledge (on nation under god), saying it promoted religion. I see the quotes from it all the time when I go to sec web. What happened?

beejay · 06-02-2003, 02:22 PM

Things move slowly....it's hard to keep track.

The 9th Circuit has said reciting the pledge with "under God" (I typed prayer first...Freudian slip) in schools is unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court has been asked to hear an appeal. If they say "no", then the ruling stands in the 9th Circuit (Western US). But I would guess that the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case and finds some way to say "under God" is not religious.

From an opinion article by James J Kilpatrick, hostile to "our" cause, but his facts (not opinions) are probably right.

Quote:

The Constitution says that Congress shall make no law �respecting an establishment of religion.� In 1954, when Congress added the words �under God� to the familiar Pledge of Allegiance, did Congress violate the First Amendment?
In a case from Illinois 10 years ago, three federal judges of the 7th Circuit said no.

In a case from California last year, two federal judges of the 9th Circuit said yes. On April 30, the issue landed in the Supreme Court on a petition for review. My guess is that the high court will agree to hear the case, reverse the 9th Circuit and give God a break. The pledge will continue to speak permissibly of �one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all.�

Canton (OH) Repository

Jewel · 06-02-2003, 02:59 PM

Well, it was certainly added with a religious intent, IIRC, and we all find out just how non religious it is anytime someone decides to challenge it.

SLD · 06-02-2003, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by beejay
Things move slowly....it's hard to keep track.

The 9th Circuit has said reciting the pledge with "under God" (I typed prayer first...Freudian slip) in schools is unconstitutional.

The Supreme Court has been asked to hear an appeal. If they say "no", then the ruling stands in the 9th Circuit (Western US). But I would guess that the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case and finds some way to say "under God" is not religious.

From an opinion article by James J Kilpatrick, hostile to "our" cause, but his facts (not opinions) are probably right.

Canton (OH) Repository

I suspect that you are right that they will consider the Pledge, as it is now constituted, to be nothing more than "ceremonial deism." Although there's been some criticism of that term, even from Christians and other non-separationists, I suspect that they will use it as a cop out. (Pardon my cynicism).

For those interested the 7th Circuit Case is: Sherman v. Community Consolidated School District 21 of Wheeling Township, 980 F.2d 437 (7th Cir. 11/20/1992). It cites heavily from the dissent in the Supreme Court case of Allegheny County v. Pittsburgh ACLU, 492 U.S. 573, which upheld the right of children not to recite the pledge.

SLD

06-02-2003, 02:07 PM	#1
Gar Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Boston, Mass Posts: 347	What happened to that case? OK. I know I'm a bad infidel for not following this, but what happened to the case that challenged the pledge (on nation under god), saying it promoted religion. I see the quotes from it all the time when I go to sec web. What happened?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-02-2003, 02:59 PM	#3
Jewel Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Northern Virginia, USA Posts: 1,112	Well, it was certainly added with a religious intent, IIRC, and we all find out just how non religious it is anytime someone decides to challenge it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.